There is likely to be two parts to Geoffrey Jackson's Subpeona

by Listener 10 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • Listener

    We've been focusing on the fact that Geoffrey Jackson will be subpoenaed to be a Witness at the Australian Royal Commission but he will also be required to present a Witness Statement before his appearance. Even if he continues to wiggle out of the appearance he has no excuse for not presenting his Witness Statement.

    This Statement will have to address questions set out by the Commission and will need to be answered. Without doubt the answers he is able to be aided by his lawyers and more 'experienced' JWs but as he is signing the Document they will be his answers and he will be responsible for their truthfulness.

    Had he shown more willingness to appear prior to yesterday the questions asked by the Commission in that Statement would not have been written with the same amount of insight that they now have. Their knowledge of procedures and policy has increased tenfold and their questioning is likely to reflect that.

    I hope the Commission goes in to as much detail with those questions as possible. They now know where the organization fails in best practice. It would be great if they could question him on every one of the flaws and have a two part question on each issue. The first asking him whether he agrees it is a flaw or not or if he recognizes the harm that their policy could have on the victim and the second part asking what changes he would consider in addressing these issues.

    This is one time where their delaying tactics will prove to be detrimental for them. They've proven to be neither wise nor discreet.


    The shadow group that owns the WTBTS have selected Jackson as a sacrifice. Muuahh-HAHAHAHAH!!!


  • username

    I have an uncomfortable feeling that this may have all been staged. All the elders playing dumb to give the Royal Commission a false sense of security, then Jackson steppes up to the board and has them spinning!

    I do hope I'm wrong as this commission do seem to be on the ball. I also feel that they have been using as much feedback as possible too. The Commission have done a sterling job so far and given a lot of exjw abuse victims and the rest of the community a lot of hope that finally this abusive cult is having to answer to its wrong practices!

  • adjusted knowledge
    adjusted knowledge
    What would happen to Jackson if he refuses to respond or show? Couldn't he just leave to New York? The GB arrogance has no bounds, they are known to not respond to subpoenas in the past.
  • Xanthippe
    I'm not sure Jackson is going to be subpoenaed. The impression I got from the hearing was that McClellan told counsel for the commission Stewart to talk to counsel for WTS and sort it out between them. We could do with Jackson's assistance if policies and procedures need to be changed is how chair McClellan put it while sympathising with Jackson's father's illness. He is aware that everything he says is being watched by the world and his words will be on YouTube for years.
  • maksutov

    username: I have an uncomfortable feeling that this may have all been staged. All the elders playing dumb to give the Royal Commission a false sense of security, then Jackson steppes up to the board and has them spinning!

    I highly doubt that. If they actually had any defense for their policies, they would not have gone to all the trouble of making themselves look foolish, committing perjury, and being uncooperative, just so that they could say 'ta da!' and reveal that they're really shining examples of how to respond to child abuse. If they had actually wanted Jackson to testify, they would have volunteered him. They clearly do not want him to testify, and are willing to make themselves look terrible, and throw even the branch coordinator under the bus to prevent him having to.

  • Zoos
    What would happen to Jackson if he refuses to respond or show?

    Jackson would never do that. As an anointed son of God and a fearless brother of Christ, once he heard the commission was looking for a governing body member he lifted his eyes heavenward and said, "Here I am Lord! Send me! Send me!"

  • Mephis

    Think much depends on how much has actually seeped through into the JW mindset.

    O'Brien could sit there, having prepared and with full knowledge of what had happened in the previous days, and still think that the issue was they've not printed the right book. They have no desire to accept any accountability or responsibility. McClellan made the point that "if you place yourself in a position to care for others and then fail, then consequences follow", but the WBTS is quite convinced that this isn't their problem. They even tried to argue that the commission was operating outside its remit because many of the cases of abuse occurred within families who just happened to be JWs. (This is in the letter exchanges related to the analysis of the WBTS' files). In other countries, they've already shown that they aren't even keen on accepting responsibility for the actions of ministerial servants and elders. McClellan seemed astounded that, in spite of months of work and discussion which they were invited to share in, the WBTS had not considered for one second how they would handle redress. But if they feel they have no responsibility, then there would be no redress. Can you imagine trying to meet a WT definition of a 'fair and just' claim even should they ever set up a fund? The organisation which specifically tells branches not to make it known their funding can be used to help publishers with things like medical expenses? Which takes the insurance premiums once paid by others but doesn't take out the external insurance and tries to persuade those supposedly covered never to claim?

    I think that's the key issue for Jackson's testimony. All their publications shunt responsibility, whatever the circumstances, onto the parents. If he doesn't get that he does have a responsibility for a lot more than offering crap advice based on a pick and mix approach to how to read the bible, then it's not going to end well for him on the stand. But to accept that responsibility will be to explode any idea of this being something to handwave away as apostate lies or false media stories. I shall enjoy watching him twist because these ******* will accept the authority to inform a man he can't wear tight trousers but not their responsibility to prevent further harm to an abused child or woman when they come to know of it.

  • Vidiot
    "True Believers", the lot of 'em.
  • brandnew
    Am i hearing right? Are they postponing for two years?

Share this